Texaco, Inc. v. Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons International Union, Local Union No. 685, Aflcio

472 F.2d 594, 82 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 12168
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 15, 1973
Docket72-2890
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 472 F.2d 594 (Texaco, Inc. v. Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons International Union, Local Union No. 685, Aflcio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Texaco, Inc. v. Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons International Union, Local Union No. 685, Aflcio, 472 F.2d 594, 82 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 12168 (5th Cir. 1973).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This case raises again before this circuit the question of whether the determination by the National Labor Relations Board that a union had committed an unfair labor practice in violation of the National Labor Relations Act is res judicata in a subsequent suit for damages under Section 303 of the Labor-Management Relations Act. In this case the NLRB held that the appellant union violated Section 8(b) (4) (ii) (B) by engaging in certain unprotected secondary activity affecting appellee Texaco. The District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, 343 F.Supp. 267, held this NLRB decision res judicata on the issue of liability and conducted a trial only on the question of damages. Texaco was awarded damages in excess of $24,000.00, and the union now appeals. We affirm.

We note that the NLRB finding of illegal secondary activity in this case was challenged by the union in an enforcement proceeding before this court and that we granted enforcement of the order. National Labor Relations Board v. Lafayette Building & Construction Trades Council, 5 Cir. 1971, 445 F.2d 495.

While the result of applying res judi-cata in this case may seem harsh, especially since there are some definite differences between Board and court proceedings, we feel that affirmance is compelled by the existing case law in this circuit. Painters v. Edgewood Contracting Co., 5 Cir. 1969, 416 F.2d 1081; *595 H. L. Robertson & Associates, Inc. v. Plumbers Local 519, 5 Cir. 1970, 429 F.2d 520. We feel that these two cases are in point on the issue raised in this case and therefore the opinion of the district court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Little
2004 OK 74 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2004)
LONE STAR STEEL COMPANY v. United Mine Workers of America
691 F. Supp. 1280 (E.D. Oklahoma, 1986)
United Tech. Com. v. Intern. Broth. of Elec. Wkrs.
597 F. Supp. 265 (S.D. New York, 1984)
Wickham Contracting Co. v. Board of Education
715 F.2d 21 (Second Circuit, 1983)
Santos v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. KAUAI DIV.
646 P.2d 962 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1982)
Jaden Elec. v. INTERN. BROTH., ETC.
508 F. Supp. 983 (D. New Jersey, 1981)
City of Hackensack v. Winner
410 A.2d 1146 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1980)
City of Hackensack v. Winner
392 A.2d 187 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1978)
Consolidated Express, Inc. v. New York Shipping Ass'n
452 F. Supp. 1024 (D. New Jersey, 1978)
Kinty v. United Mine Workers of America
544 F.2d 706 (Fourth Circuit, 1976)
Eazor Express, Inc. v. General Teamsters Local 326
388 F. Supp. 1264 (D. Delaware, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
472 F.2d 594, 82 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 12168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/texaco-inc-v-operative-plasterers-and-cement-masons-international-union-ca5-1973.